UML 2.0 - Static Infrastructure
What is UML 2.0 really like? I have tried to answer this question in two ways:
Below are the inheritance diagrams for the static classes. There may be many errors, partly because I have great difficulty understanding the specifications. One problem was a style that specifies the properties of subclasses in the superclass chapter, this gives the illusion of reverse inheritance. More important was the deciphering of the merge relation. One problem was the terminology; the target is less than the source. Another problem was that I found it difficult to find the packages and the relationships between them. I am not at all certain that I got it right. A third problem is that there be a number of empty subclasses that I have missed.
I have based my diagrams on the specs as they were recommended in June 2003. I am hopeful that the FTF will make the specs easier to read. (And also nore consistent)
I use three formats for the diagrams:
The diagrams are based on the 2nd revised submission from the U2Partners ad-2003-04-01 .
.PDF (6 447 598 bytes)
Static-17-05 .INDD (557 056 bytes)
|Composite poster||Static classes, packages and literals. Prints very nicely A0 or A1 size paper. (My wall poster is actually 1180mm x 915mm or 46"x 36")|
.GIF (141 776 bytes)
Literals-16 .GIF (8 392 bytes)
Static-17 .ZARGO (73 301 bytes)
|The Classes (Association Ends are
shown as attributes)
Some Literals etc.
|Two class inheritance diagrams for the static part uf UML and the literals.|
.GIF (27 683 bytes)
StaticPackages-13 .ZARGO (8 427 bytes)
|Package Structure||The static packages and their relationships.|
(Last updated by Trygve 2004-01-11)